The meaning of the GSG wording

[lynn cates]

meaningless

Hello CD. Thanks. I agree with their motive.

My dilemma is that if the killer had written it, it was futile--meaningless.

But if it were a Gentile trying to implicate a Jew, it was, again, fruitless.

Cheers.
LC

[c.d.]

Hello Lynn,

My problem with the GSG is that if we assume that all of the Ripper letters were hoaxes, the one time that the killer attempts to communicate is while fleeing the night of the double event. And, as you say, to take that risk in order to write something that to us seems pointless doesn't really make sense.

Also, if he was willing to take the risk, his message has now been erased before it reaches the public. Yet, he apparently accepted that rather than attempt another message shortly thereafter. Just doesn't make sense to me.

c.d.

P.S. It is a beautiful day here in Washington, D.C.. I have taken the day off so I can ride my bike. Maybe we can discuss this further tomorrow.

[lynn cates]

excellent

Hello CD. Thanks.

Excellent points, all.

Enjoy your day!

Cheers.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

Hello CD. Thanks.

Excellent points, all.

Seconded.

[Sam Flynn]

But would we really expect to see any examples [of contemporaneous graffiti]?

Indeed we wouldn't, GUT. In the pecking-order of Victorian photographs, I guess that the capture of graffiti on film would rank somewhere between cracked paving-stones and dog turds.

The good news is that, in the fields of Victorian literature and journalism, chalk graffiti gets mentioned rather more frequently than either.

[GUT]

Indeed we wouldn't, GUT. In the pecking-order of Victorian photographs, I guess that the capture of graffiti on film would rank somewhere between cracked paving-stones and dog turds.

The good news is that, in the fields of Victorian literature and journalism, chalk graffiti gets mentioned rather more frequently than either.

G'day Sam

I am really upset by this.

I could really picture them running around with their trusty 10X8 plate cameras taking pictures of Dog Turds, cracked pavement and graffiti. Can't you?

[Wickerman]

.... the police somehow attached importance to it and possibly conclude that it was a Jew who was doing the killing or was somehow involved...

Hi c.d.
That certainly puts a new spin on it.

Seeing as how the authorities are suspecting Jews, here's something to suspect them for?

[DVV]

Yes. The size of the text, the ambiguity of meaning...no one has been able to show us any examples of anything similar...and contemporaneous to this grafitti. Yet, Dew says it was common, and mant casebookers say it was common. Outside of a few photoshopped, comedic pictures, there has been no evidence of anything else.

Mike

Hi Mike

I agree entirely.

Cheers

[c.d.]

Hi Mike

I agree entirely.

Cheers

Can we come up with a reason why Dew might lie about this?

[c.d.]

Sorry, I screwed my previous post up. I meant to add more text.

How many people in Whitechapel owned cameras? In 1888, photography was much more expensive and required more training than it does today. As Sam pointed out, if you had photographic equipment, why would you use it to take a picture of graffiti?

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Lynn,

My problem with the GSG is that if we assume that all of the Ripper letters were hoaxes, the one time that the killer attempts to communicate is while fleeing the night of the double event. And, as you say, to take that risk in order to write something that to us seems pointless doesn't really make sense.

Also, if he was willing to take the risk, his message has now been erased before it reaches the public. Yet, he apparently accepted that rather than attempt another message shortly thereafter. Just doesn't make sense to me.

c.d.

P.S. It is a beautiful day here in Washington, D.C.. I have taken the day off so I can ride my bike. Maybe we can discuss this further tomorrow.

Hi cd,

There were other "communications" aside from the letters, the GSG is one of them, so is the package that Lusk received. Whether either were from someone responsible for any Canonical death isn't clear, but it is interesting that one communication could have definitively been traced had modern analysis been available. We could have known almost instantly if the kidney section was indeed Kates, making that the only communication that could have been scientifically proven to have been linked with a victim.

Handwriting analysis is not a science, its subjectively interpretive...which means that none of the letters would have the same prosecutorial impact as that section would have had.

Cheers

[Sam Flynn]

There were other "communications" aside from the letters, the GSG is one of them, so is the package that Lusk received. Whether either were from someone responsible for any Canonical death isn't clear

True, but at least we can say that the letters and the Lusk package were intentionally designed to convey messages (hoaxed or not) relating to the murders. We can't, however, claim as much for the GSG, which may have had nothing to do with the murders, or murderer, at all.

In other words, are the Lusk/Openshaw/Dear Boss letters "communications" relating to the Ripper? Yes, they are. Is the GSG a "Ripper communication"? It depends on your point of view.

[Bridewell]

Yet we simply don't hear of other messages getting the immediate attention and reaction this one did - its speedy removal.

Hi Caz,

Why would we hear of it? The only reason we hear of the treatment meted out to the GSG was that it was positioned in close proximity to the apron piece.

[Bridewell]

The meaning of the GSG has to take account of the two versions but, as everyone seems to prefer the Long/Warren version, I'll confine my observation to that. The meaning seems to depend on whether the writer is presumed to be literate or illiterate.

"The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing".

Literate = People will be fully justified in blaming the Jews.

Illiterate = The Jews never accept the blame for anything they do.

or alternatively

The Jews are the culprits but they always escape the blame.

These seem to me to be the most likely intended meanings, none of which is in any way complimentary to the Jews so the likelihood has to be that the writer was Gentile. If 'Juwes' (or whatever the actual spelling was) is truly a mis-spelling of 'Jews' the illiterate interpretations seem a better fit.

[c.d.]

Hello Bridewell,

I think that you also have to include a pro-Jewish sentiment, i.e., the Jews are not going to accept blame for something they didn't do.

c.d.